GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently September 20 19, 1:06 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: March 16 07, 1:04 pm 
Offline
There's someone in my head but it's not me
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 5:08 pm
Posts: 43859
Location: Clowns to the left of me. Jokers to the right. Here I am.
If we have serious issues with our starting rotation or the health or production of our outfield, and those issues are not addressd, then yeah, I suppose 90 losses is possible.

But I don't expect that will be the case. I have confidence Walt will make any in-season moves necessary to keep us a competitive team.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: March 16 07, 1:06 pm 
Offline
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you

Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm
Posts: 50681
thrill wrote:
This is the answer to their optimistic review of the Cardinals. I believe they do this with all teams.

http://gatewayredbirds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14726


Yeah, they are doing that with all teams. It's a series of articles, and it's interesting to hear how they can give DRays and Royal fans hope. But A for effort, they really try.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: March 16 07, 1:38 pm 
Online
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm
Posts: 24337
Nate Silver boldly wrote:
I’ve publicly disavowed PECOTA’s projection that the 2005 champs will finish with 90 losses


I don't think I can overstate the courage this must have taken. Most of us would only utter these thoughts at a whisper in a closed room to trusted relatives. The Nate Silvers of the world will save us all from that fear which festers within ourselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: March 16 07, 1:59 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 7:12 pm
Posts: 6344
Location: The Hub
ghostrunner wrote:
Nate Silver boldly wrote:
I’ve publicly disavowed PECOTA’s projection that the 2005 champs will finish with 90 losses


I don't think I can overstate the courage this must have taken. Most of us would only utter these thoughts at a whisper in a closed room to trusted relatives. The Nate Silvers of the world will save us all from that fear which festers within ourselves.


(chuckle) your point is duly noted, but in my opinion Nate Silver is pretty good. He's also a lot quicker to issue such retractions than some of us stubborn, partisan fans.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: March 16 07, 3:59 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 10:37 pm
Posts: 5534
I agree with him that we should have at least looked at Durham but the notion that we can just sign whoever we want because we have the money is ignorant. This is an overreaction (I think its supposed to be). We have a better chance of winning 100 than we do of losing 90.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: March 16 07, 4:10 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: May 12 06, 7:09 pm
Posts: 8382
Location: CoMo
skmsw wrote:
I have not done any modeling yet, but off the top of my head, I think the risk of the downside of our questionmarks and gambles is a little lower, than the potential of the up-side is high. Everything falling into place and we're a 90-win team. Most things not falling into place and we're a 90-loss team. Things working out the way I expect, we're about a 500 team.


I agree with this, but since we won the WS last year I'm alright with that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: March 16 07, 5:40 pm 
Offline
Veteran Player

Joined: April 20 06, 5:39 pm
Posts: 985
longhornbaseball wrote:
We have a better chance of winning 100 than we do of losing 90.


Not sure about this part


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: March 16 07, 6:11 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Posts: 19877
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis
Update from Nate:

Quote:
Less Despair, but More Skepticism

by Nate Silver

My most recent post on the Cardinals‘ prospects this season has generated a fair amount of hate mail. Most of it was focused around my claim that Walt Jocketty “allowed the Cardinals to bleed talent when they desperately needed to add it”.

The “talent” the Cardinals lost this winter was pitching talent — namely Jeff Weaver, Jeff Suppan, and Jason Marquis. You might assume that I was suggesting that Jocketty needed to do more to replace that pitching talent, but in fact that isn’t really the case. I’m pretty comfortable with not paying the markup for pitching this winter, and I’m pretty comfortable with how their rotation is shaking out. In fact PECOTA projects the Cardinals to allow the second-fewest runs in the National League, behind only the Padres, who have their huge park working for them. The pitching is fine. But I think Jocketty desperately needed to add some offense.

Here’s the thing. If you’re going to go with Molina at catcher because of his defense, and David Eckstein at shortstop because of his defense/intangibles, and Encarnacion in right field because, well, he’s there — I don’t necessarily begrudge those decisions. But it does mean that you’re getting below-average offense out of three spots in the lineup. Way below average in Molina’s case. And so there’s not a lot of room for error in the places where you might have some flexibility. In the Cardinals’ case, that flexibility was at second base and left field.

The Adam Kennedy signing does not look bad in a vaccum. He came cheap, and he carries a good glove. Still, this is a guy who is supposed to set the table for Albert Pujols, and his OBP last year was .334. Makes sense for a team like the Red Sox, who could stick him in the nine hole. Doesn’t make sense for the Cardinals, whose entire offense revolves around setting up Pujols. You know what deal I really liked this winter? Ray Durham to the Giants for 2 years, $14 million. That’s the kind of deal I was hoping to see Jocketty make.

Then you have left field. Chris Duncan PECOTAs out at .273/.356/.488. That isn’t bad, but it’s mitigated by the fact that the right-handed side of his platoon won’t be able to match those numbers, and that his defense shouldn’t be seen by young children. So I’d have liked to see the Cardinals bring in someone along the lines of Moises Alou. It’s not like you’re discarding Duncan; you can put him in a quasi-platoon with Encarnacion in right, and frankly you might need Encarnacion in center anyway if Jim Edmonds gets hurt again.

So instead of having this lineup (with 2007 PECOTA projections)…

Code:
David Eckstein  .278/.338/.348
Adam Kennedy    .270/.334/.394
Albert Pujols   .331/.428/.617
Scott Rolen     .283/.367/.504
Jim Edmonds     .252/.356/.479
Juan Encarnacion.272/.323/.437
Duncan/Wilson** .270/.344/.467
Yadier Molina   .249/.306/.356
** Weighted average assuming Duncan gets 2/3 of playing time.


…the Cardinals could very easily have had this one…

Code:
David Eckstein  .278/.338/.348
Ray Durham      .304/.373/.500
Albert Pujols   .331/.428/.617
Scott Rolen     .283/.367/.504
Jim Edmonds     .252/.356/.479
Moises Alou     .287/.355/.484
Duncan/E’crcn** .273/.345/.471
Yadier Molina   .249/.306/.356
** Weighted average assuming Duncan gets 2/3 of playing time.


That’s a much more robust offense, and it would only have cost the Cardinals an extra $10-$12 million this season to procure, without any overly cumbersome long-term commitments.

The most salient fact from the point of view of Jocketty’s planning is that his team won 83 games last year. Teams that win 83 games don’t usually win the World Series; in fact, they don’t usually make the playoffs. Running in place wasn’t going to cut it, and if the Cardinals lose ground due to injuries, there are scenarios where this is a pretty bleeping bad baseball club.


That's a more fair assessment. Although, this isn't true.

Quote:
The Adam Kennedy signing does not look bad in a vaccum. He came cheap, and he carries a good glove. Still, this is a guy who is supposed to set the table for Albert Pujols, and his OBP last year was .334.


And I don't see how you could take this any other way.

Quote:
The “talent” the Cardinals lost this winter was pitching talent — namely Jeff Weaver, Jeff Suppan, and Jason Marquis. You might assume that I was suggesting that Jocketty needed to do more to replace that pitching talent, but in fact that isn’t really the case.


But I agree here.

Quote:
The pitching is fine. But I think Jocketty desperately needed to add some offense.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: March 16 07, 6:23 pm 
Offline
Veteran Player

Joined: April 20 06, 5:39 pm
Posts: 985
I have no idea why Rolen's offensive production is so underrated. I mean he's always around 285/370/530 every year, yet everyone acts like Pujols has no help whatsoever.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: March 16 07, 9:54 pm 
Offline
Puppy Murderer
User avatar

Joined: April 25 06, 6:07 pm
Posts: 8950
Location: Across the River
Legynd wrote:
Has MLB ever awarded the World Series Championship trophy based on PECOTA projections?


Little known fact: MLB gave a replica trophy to the best PECOTA team in 1994.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AWvsCBsteeeerike3, Gashouse, GeddyWrox, Google [Bot], heyzeus, jack76, Jayramball04, Majestic-12 [Bot], Michael, MinorLeagueGuy, wart57 and 31 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group